Eight major supply chains contribute to more than 50% of the global greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). These supply chains range from raw materials to end-product manufacturing. Hence, it is critical to accurately estimate the carbon footprint of these supply chains, identify GHG hotspots, explain the factors that create the hotspots, and carry out what-if analysis to reduce the carbon footprint of supply chains. Towards this, we propose an enterprise decarbonization accelerator framework with a modular structure that automates carbon footprint estimation, identification of hotspots, explainability, and what-if analysis to recommend measures to reduce the carbon footprint of supply chains. To illustrate the working of the framework, we apply it to the cradle-to-gate extent of the palm oil supply chain of a leading palm oil producer. The framework identified that the farming stage is the hotspot in the considered supply chain. As the next level of analysis, the framework identified the hotspots in the farming stage and provided explainability on factors that created hotspots. We discuss the what-if scenarios and the recommendations generated by the framework to reduce the carbon footprint of the hotspots and the resulting impact on palm oil tree yield.

The aviation industry’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions have driven the rapid development and scale-up of sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs). SAFs have the potential to significantly reduce CO2 lifecycle emissions by up to 80% in comparison to Jet A and other conventional fossil-derived jet fuels. For multiple logistical and practical reasons, it is preferable to ensure that SAFs are ‘essentially identical’ (also referred to as ‘drop-in SAF’) to conventional jet fuel in terms of their performance, durability and compatibility with existing hardware systems. Because the majority of SAFs are not identical (non-drop-in) to conventional jet fuel, they have not been approved for use in their neat (100%) form. Instead, these non-identical SAFs are named synthetic blend components (SBC) as they are blended with conventional fuels to different extents per ASTM D7566-23a. It should be noted that there are on-going efforts to develop non-drop in SAF specifications to broaden their proliferation and maximise the aviation industries’ ability to reduce CO2 lifecycle emissions. One very important area of focus is the compatibility of SAFs with engine and fuel system seals, specifically understanding the dynamics of elastomeric seals. To address this, a novel approach has been developed to measure seal dynamics in flowing fuel. This technique has been applied to study the dynamic seal behaviour of four industrially relevant elastomer seals commonly employed in aviation fuel systems. The study involved three test fuels: (i) conventional fossil-derived Jet A, neat hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids (HEFA) SAF, and neat alcohol to jet (ATJ) SAF. Notably, both HEFA and ATJ fuels contain 0% aromatics, in contrast to Jet A, which typically contains around 17% aromatics by volume. The novel fuel-elastomer test rig used in this study was designed to simulate a practical scenario in which fuel flows through the inner surface of a pre-loaded static O-ring. The results of these tests demonstrate that the behaviour of different nitrile elastomers is unique to their formulation, and in all cases, the behaviour in HEFA and ATJ SAF differs significantly from that in Jet A. However, new fuel approval tests may only list one type of elastomer for evaluation, for example the ‘Fit-for-Purpose’ test in ASTM D4054-22 Tier 2 lists one specific nitrile. The findings of this study highlight the complexities of fuel-elastomer interactions within nominally identical chemical families and emphasise the potential risks of assessing compatibility based on tests conducted with a single member of a chemical family.

Decarbonization is a momentous challenge for capitalism and makes one ask which changes in its morphology may be necessary to achieve that objective. The contribution by the French economist Albert Aftalion (1874–1956), with its emphasis on intermediate levels of aggregation (the “meso“ approach), the differentiated time profiles of economic actoivities, and their differential speeds of reaction to dynamic impulses, provides an invaluable heuristic for conceptualizing the structural transformations required by transition to a low energy regime. Aftalion’s analysis of industrial capitalism emphasizes that structural changes occur along multiple co-existing time horizons. This provides tools to analyze the time constraints on the sequencing of structural changes for different sectors on a decarbonization trajectory without neglecting the strict time requirements for implementing effective climate change mitigation. This interplay of time horizons is central to decarbonization, and it will require a new balance between the invisible hand of markets and the visible hand of states and other public bodies. Moreover, Aftalion’s emphasis on material constraints offers a novel approach to conceptualizing the importance of intermediate levels of aggregation in economic theory, thereby offering a new basis for sectoral policymaking and a fundamental challenge to institutionalist accounts of the morphology of capitalism.

Law plays an important role in reshaping and enforcing governance efforts in radical shifts and can function as a catalyst for transitioning governance towards sustainability. This article assesses the capacity of law to facilitate decarbonization as a radical societal shift. It argues that decarbonization demands fundamental and systemic restructuring in law and legal thinking. This should also be reflected in legal scholarship and, most importantly from the point of view of this article, in the methodological choices and approaches that legal scholarship relies on to study societal challenges. To that end, the article develops a new methodological approach (disciplinary comparison) through which to study law's capacities in respect of decarbonization as a radical societal shift. Disciplinary comparison can be used to gain information on both the friction and the synergies between legal disciplines. This new methodological approach will contribute to increasing insight into law's capacities for the radical, cross-sectoral change necessitated by the need to decarbonize societies.

Electric power sectors around the world have changed dramatically in the last 25 years as a result of sector liberalization policies. Many electricity sectors are now pursuing deep decarbonization goals which will entail replacing dispatchable fossil generation primarily with intermittent renewable generation (wind and solar) over the next 20–30 years. This transition creates new challenges for both short-term wholesale market design and investment incentives consistent with achieving both decarbonization commitments and security of supply criteria. Thinking broadly about the options for institutional change from a Williamsonian perspective – thinking like Williamson – provides a useful framework for examining institutional adaptation. Hybrid markets that combine ‘competition for the market’ that relies on competitive procurement for long-term purchased power agreements with wind, solar, and storage developers, ideally in a technology neutral fashion, and ‘competition in the market’ that relies on short-term markets designed to produce efficient and reliable operations of intermittent generation and storage, is identified as a promising direction for institutional adaptation. Many auction, contract, and market integration issues remain to be resolved.

Whereas scholars have typically modeled climate change as a global collective action challenge, we offer a dynamic theory of climate politics based on the present and future revaluation of assets. Climate politics can be understood as a contest between owners of assets that accelerate climate change, such as fossil fuel plants, and owners of assets vulnerable to climate change, such as coastal property. To date, obstruction by “climate-forcing” asset holders has been a large barrier to effective climate policy. But as climate change and decarbonization policies proceed, holders of both climate-forcing and “climate-vulnerable” assets stand to lose some or even all of their assets' value over time, and with them, the basis of their political power. This dynamic contest between opposing interests is likely to intensify in many sites of political contestation, from the subnational to transnational levels. As it does so, climate politics will become increasingly existential, potentially reshaping political alignments within and across countries. Such shifts may further undermine the Liberal International Order (LIO); as countries develop pro-climate policies at different speeds and magnitudes, they will have incentives to diverge from existing arrangements over trade and economic integration.

Decarbonization has been identified as necessary to preventing catastrophic climate change, creating a dilemma for the global oil industry. This article examines the industry's reaction to this dilemma and focuses on its historical response to market and governmental regulatory pressure. The article argues that differing national climate policies provoked some oil companies to develop proactive decarbonization strategies. However, the continued growth of fossil fuel demand, the industry's vested interests, and the voluntary nature of climate governance have resulted in the industry taking very little meaningful action to achieve decarbonization.